AB -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: CO/1502/2023

In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court

26 April 2023

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

Between:

The King on the application of
AB

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department
(HO Ref: GWF067016686)

and

X
Y (interested parties)

Order

On the Claimant’s application for anonymity orders and expedition;
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant;
Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

  1. Pursuant to CPR r.39.2, in any report of these proceedings, there shall be no publication of the names and addresses of the Claimant and the Interested Parties, nor any other particulars likely to lead to their identification. In the proceedings, the Claimant shall be anonymised and referred to as “AB” and the Interested Parties shall be anonymised and referred to as “X” and “Y”.
  2. The Claimant’s solicitors shall file with the Court copies of case documents which have been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimant and the Interested Parties, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
  3. Non-parties may not obtain any documents from the court file which have not been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimant and the Interested Parties, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
  4. The claim is fit for expedition.
  5. No later than 10 days after the filing of the Acknowledgment of Service, the application for permission shall be considered by a Judge on the papers.
  6. Liberty to apply to vary or discharge this order on 2 days notice to the other party.
  7. Costs reserved.

Reasons

  1. The Claimant is at severe risk of harm from the Taliban in Afghanistan. Therefore the claim should be expedited.
  2. For the same reason, I have granted an anonymity order for her and her family members who are the Interested Parties. In the circumstances, a departure from the general principle of open justice is justified.